These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it
Naresh Manakchand Jain v. The Registrar, ITAT (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal- Powers- Search - Alleged Accommodation entry provider - 32,000+ beneficiaries- Shell companies -Alleged Money Laundering - Direction issued by the Tribunal to AO to intimate/report to SEBI, ED, MCA and ROC regarding details of money laundering activities. [S. 132, 150, S. 11 of Prevention of Money- Laundering Act, 2002; 11,… Read More ...
Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: Under Section 19(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 it is necessary that a copy of the written grounds of arrest is furnished to the arrested person without exception. Otherwise, the arrest would be unlawful The chronology of events speaks volumes and reflects rather poorly, if not negatively, on the Directorate of Enforcement… Read More ...
Shri Ishak vs. ITO (ITAT Indore)
ITAT Indore: The subsequent generation of DIN would not change the illegality of the order –ITAT Indore Facts of the case 1. That the order u/s. 154, dated 10.10.2019 was initially issued in manual mode on 10.10.2019, without generating a Document Identification Number (DIN), in contravention of the CBDT Circular No.19 of 2019 dated 14.8.2019. 2. That… Read More ...
Undercarriage and Tractor Parts Pvt. Ltd Vs Dispute Resolution Panel (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court : The Bombay High Court has quashed an Assessment order and Directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). The court's ruling underscores that the DRP's authority to issue directions is limited to cases with pending assessments. Section 144C of the Act presupposes an ongoing assessment process, and if the assessing officer prematurely issues an assessment… Read More ...
DCIT VS. Asian star company limited (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT mumbai: Even if it is held that the purchases from sales parties are bogus, then also, the proper course would be to determine the profit arising from the purchases by looking at corresponding sales and what amount of gross profit is earned on alleged bogus purchases. If the alleged bogus purchases show gross profit higher than… Read More ...
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Bangalore and Anr. (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court : (i) Even if the pre-conditions prescribed under Section 245C are to be read into Section 245H, it cannot be said that in every case, the material "disclosed" by the assessee before the Commission must be something apart from what was discovered by the Assessing Officer. What is of relevance is that the assessee offered to… Read More ...
Ashok Commercial Enterprises v. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Business of financing-Loan not repaid-Treated as bad-debts-Search on the premises of debtors-Subsequently, notice issued to- Assessing Officer is not justified in assuming jurisdiction where assessment has not been abated where no incriminating material was found- Best judgement assessment-Notice under section 143(2) is mandatory-Reassessment-Change of opinion-Issues dealt with during… Read More ...
Hemant Dinkar Kandlur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) – 3 (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: Under Section 54(1) of the Act as it existed prior to the amendment by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2014, the only condition to be fulfilled to claim deduction under Section 54 of the Act was that a new residential house be purchased within the prescribed time dehors any condition as to the location of such… Read More ...
ITO, Ward 10 (1) vs. Gammon Construction Pvt.Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi: The assessee cannot be asked to prove with witnesses and documentary evidences the non-occurring of an event "The AO is not justified in concluding that the assessee failed to prove that no cash transaction has taken place and that no independent witness or documentary evidence was produced to prove that the cash transaction did not… Read More ...
P. M. PAUL VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court: One of the conditions for seeking the benefit under the Amnesty scheme is that there should be no pending proceeding and in order to comply with that condition, the appellant had withdrawn his appeal then pending before the appellate authority. But there is no bar as such for seeking restoration of the appeal if the… Read More ...